It was just a few weeks ago that I felt we were positioned to just go BPA 1-7. Suddenly, we've lost our #1 pass rusher and RW is getting sacked (much more than we'd like).

I had hopes of taking a DT (Jenkins) and a wideout (or the TE from ND) early. Now I'm not so sure. Has this injury to Clemons caused any of you to re-think the 2013 draft. What did you come up with?

BTW, It would be nice to have another WR, but we look pretty good at the position right now, IMO. Especially with Miller getting more and more freed up (but that could be contributing to the sack problem as well).

Last edited by HawkWow on Mon Jan 07, 2013 4:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Are you lost? Looking for Miami Dolphin's website? Our team is still in the playoffs and look like they are making a Superbowl run...

Unnecessary trolling.

However - there is a draft forum.

Moreover, we will have all the draft talk possible within 3 days of the end of our season (hopefully in February) - I assure you - you will be satisfied with draft talk soon.

Fair enough. I guess I'm getting a bit rattled with this talk of losing Clem (perhaps permanently) and bringing Edwards on board. We've been really fortunate this year...now we are faced with brining in kickers that haven't kicked and unwanted DEs. I will further explore the other areas of the forum before posting next time. But IMO, this next draft is many times more important than "what will Russell Wilson have for breakfast on game day"? type threads, LOL.

Irvin is Clemons replacement. We may now need to look for Irvin's replacement. Unfortunately our resident draftniks have said that there are no true Leo prospects in the first round of this draft. However, I will counter with no one thought Irvin would go in the first round this time last year.

Looking at the 2013 draft class, there are only a handful of defensive players that fit the 4.4 criteria. Two that are most intriguing to me are LB Jonathan Brown (6'1, 235, 4.49) and CB Desmond Trufant (6'0, 184, 4.42).

On the offensive side... were not as explosive. Marshawn and Golden Tate both run 40s in the low 4.40s. One player I hope we have on our draft board is Jared Abbrederis (6'2, 185, 4.41), one of Wilson's receivers at Wisconsin. Jared has good size and quickness and should really help Wilson take advantage of his ability to extend plays.

There are also several OGs that are interesting as well... off the top of my head, Ricky Wagner (Wisconsin), Larry Warford and Alvin Bailey look intriguing.

Though I doubt we will look at TEs (Tom Cable brought in Zach Miller for a reason), I think we would have to take a long look at either of Stanford's monster TEs.

I just don't see picking a OLB that high. Look at Bobby... Probably rookie of the year, a very solid player. A game changer ..no. The LB position is very rarely a position that allows it. I think your first pick has to be a game changer for the Hawks. We are pretty solid otherwise

I'd like to see a stud DL. Of all positions a DL gives you the biggest bang for the pick. A WR would be nice or a TE as well if the the DL choices are thin. We still need the big Mike Williams type body to catch in traffic. There is crossover at the point with TEs that are very athletic that can go either way like Winslow was able to do.

I really like the trades and Free Agents signings I see as all possible. Flynn could factor into a trade as well for a player

A pass rushing 3-tech is by far the biggest need heading into the off season. Alan Branch is great at what he does, as was Jason Jones before he got hurt, but what we really need is one guy that can do the job of those two and can stay of the field for 3 downs.

This poster officially refuses to recognize SacHawk2.0 as a moderator or authority figure of any description.

@Happypuppy, Thanks for the feedback. I agree with you that the Hawks are best off getting an impact DT that can create some pressure. If we can get Sheldon Richardson or Kawann Short late in the 1st round I would be very happy. If we can trade Flynn for a 2nd rounder, we can do something like this:

@CANHawk, Thanks. I think a pass-rushing 3-tech completes this defense... but not sure it's a desperate need.

@Onanygivensunday. I think Maualuga is coming around. Bengals def played really well down the stretch and Maualuga is clearly their leader. I only suggested here because of his history w/ Carroll. That said, he is a bit slower than what were accustomed to.

SDHawk wrote:@Happypuppy, Thanks for the feedback. I agree with you that the Hawks are best off getting an impact DT that can create some pressure. If we can get Sheldon Richardson or Kawann Short late in the 1st round I would be very happy. If we can trade Flynn for a 2nd rounder, we can do something like this:

@CANHawk, Thanks. I think a pass-rushing 3-tech completes this defense... but not sure it's a desperate need.

@Onanygivensunday. I think Maualuga is coming around. Bengals def played really well down the stretch and Maualuga is clearly their leader. I only suggested here because of his history w/ Carroll. That said, he is a bit slower than what were accustomed to.

So, you do not believe that a pass-rushing three-technique is a desperate need for the Seahawks? Explain please?

So, you do not believe that a pass-rushing three-technique is a desperate need for the Seahawks? Explain please?

Sure.

Our defense ranks:

1st in points allowed per game4th in total yards allowed per game6th in passing yards allowed per game10th in rushing yards allowed per game

Our offense ranks:

9th in points per game17th in total yards per game27th in passing yards per game3rd in rushing yards per game

Do you need any more detail beyond this?

Alan Branch is not a folding chair. He is serviceable, if not very good at what he does. I think DT is a need to complete this defensive scheme but I don't see it as a desperate need.

Since these two numbers are skewed because of the late opening of the playbook then I do require more detail.

I am not one who will panic about average sack numbers because there are pressures. We have two speed rushers that make the QB step up into the pocket. Our problem is that we have nobody to make the QB pay for that movement. We need push in the middle of the defense. A gap shooting three-technique is definitely a need on this team.

So, you do not believe that a pass-rushing three-technique is a desperate need for the Seahawks? Explain please?

Sure.

Our defense ranks:

1st in points allowed per game4th in total yards allowed per game6th in passing yards allowed per game10th in rushing yards allowed per game

Our offense ranks:

9th in points per game17th in total yards per game27th in passing yards per game3rd in rushing yards per game

Do you need any more detail beyond this?

Alan Branch is not a folding chair. He is serviceable, if not very good at what he does. I think DT is a need to complete this defensive scheme but I don't see it as a desperate need.

Since these two numbers are skewed because of the late opening of the playbook then I do require more detail.

I am not one who will panic about average sack numbers because there are pressures. We have two speed rushers that make the QB step up into the pocket. Our problem is that we have nobody to make the QB pay for that movement. We need push in the middle of the defense. A gap shooting three-technique is definitely a need on this team.

I thought we were talking about the desperate need for a DT. Not sure why you want the granular detail behind those offensive rankings.

I'm not disagreeing that we could use one, just pointing out that impact DTs might be thin by the time it gets around to the Hawks first pick.

What do you guys think of Sheldon Richardson/Kawann Short. I think Richardson might be more athletic and explosive but I think Kawann's game is more NFL ready..

I used the numbers that you supplied to show that there was a bigger need on offense even though the numbers that you furnished are skewed. You also mentioned that there was not a desperate need for a three technique and I disagree. The team should address that need in the draft. Whether there is a talent available in the late first round is irrelevant. You just added that aspect into the discussion by saying that you did not see any available in the late first. Even if that were true, the desperate need does not just disappear.

Last edited by CurryStopstheRuns on Wed Jan 09, 2013 10:07 am, edited 1 time in total.

So, you do not believe that a pass-rushing three-technique is a desperate need for the Seahawks? Explain please?

Sure.

Our defense ranks:

1st in points allowed per game4th in total yards allowed per game6th in passing yards allowed per game10th in rushing yards allowed per game

Our offense ranks:

9th in points per game17th in total yards per game27th in passing yards per game3rd in rushing yards per game

Do you need any more detail beyond this?

Alan Branch is not a folding chair. He is serviceable, if not very good at what he does. I think DT is a need to complete this defensive scheme but I don't see it as a desperate need.

Those offensive rankings are in a bit of a vacuum my brotha (and I think you know that). Russell has improved by leaps and bounds over the first half of the season, Sidney looks like a bonafied #1, Golden Tate has finally broken out, Doug Baldwin is catching everything that's thrown his way, Zack Miller has been looking like the pro bowl pass catching Zack Milelr of old and even Tony McCoy and Mike Rob are getting into the act.

But if you insist on looking at rankings, how about 18th in the league in sacks? That's below league average BTW. A good penetrating 3-tech will go a long way to improving that number. And if you want to look at THE BIG PICTURE, improving our sack numbers will help force teams off the field on 3rd down, which will improve the time of posession ratio, which will give the offense more time on the field, which will give the offense more opportunities to throw the ball which will improve the passing statistics.

Therefore... a pass rushing 3-tech is the single most important need in the off season. As for who will be available by the time we pick though I have absolutely ZERO clue (but I know we really really need one).

This poster officially refuses to recognize SacHawk2.0 as a moderator or authority figure of any description.

SDHawk wrote:@Happypuppy, Thanks for the feedback. I agree with you that the Hawks are best off getting an impact DT that can create some pressure. If we can get Sheldon Richardson or Kawann Short late in the 1st round I would be very happy. If we can trade Flynn for a 2nd rounder, we can do something like this:

@CANHawk, Thanks. I think a pass-rushing 3-tech completes this defense... but not sure it's a desperate need.

@Onanygivensunday. I think Maualuga is coming around. Bengals def played really well down the stretch and Maualuga is clearly their leader. I only suggested here because of his history w/ Carroll. That said, he is a bit slower than what were accustomed to.

I like the Richardson pick a lot. I've had my eye on Jenkins at the DT spot, but it's been reported he comes with "baggage". Irvin came with baggage too, so....

It's also been reported Jenkins, who apparently won't blow anyone away with his SAT scores, "plays with an attitude". Dependant on how significant the baggage, I like the attitude part.

You have Trufant falling to the 3rd and if he's still there when we pick, he would probably be good value, but even though I bleed PURPLE, I wouldn't want to take him any higher and I think it possible, despite his sometimes eratic play, that he will be gone prior to the bottom of the 3rd.. but I could be wrong.

Seattle will identify a handful of players in round 1 that they love and target them regardless of position. By JS's own admission, this is what they did last year. After the 3rd round or so, I expect this draft to be like any other, Seattle will grab bag all the players they feel could be hidden gems in their system.

The term "needs" get thrown around too much. Don't fall into that trap. Drafting a DT is not do or die. Both Branch and Jones were above average this season in their respective roles. We can do better, but it's not make or break. And if we did want to do better, the draft isn't the place to do it. Having watched most of the DTs with 1st round potential this year, I strongly feel that this is a really bad year to take one early. Very over-rated class. Free Agency could have potential though, especially if Melton or Starks become available.

We don't "need" shit. KC has needs. KC would be insane to not draft a QB #1. AZ has needs. AZ would be insane to not draft a QB or OL in the 1st round. You can't say that about the Seahawks. Are there areas of opportunity? Sure. Identify players who will be future stars in your system and go get them.

Long story short, the focus of this draft should not be about filling position X. It should be about finding special players.

Last edited by kearly on Wed Jan 09, 2013 5:30 pm, edited 2 times in total.

kearly wrote:Seattle will identify a handful of players in round 1 that they love and target them regardless of position. By JS's own admission, this is what they did last year and that was a team that still had true draft needs. After the 3rd round or so, I expect this draft to be like any other, Seattle will grab bag all the players they feel could be hidden gems in their system.

This is what I expected the majority of the year. I felt like we were pretty solid across the board and would likely spend the weekend going BPA...inclusive of the 1st rd. DT, RT, LB, WR....? I had no idea where JS and PC would go. Now with this need at DE? The good news is I am trusting this FO like perhaps none before it. Additionally, the team is so relatively young or new, I think the development of rookies will be easier than if we had a bunch of grizzed vets on the team. These are good times.

I've always hated the term "BPA" and I try to avoid using it. The reason is because BPA is inevitably connected to the evils of conventional wisdom: Mel Kiper's big board, et al. For example, Aaron Curry was BPA in 2009 by conventional wisdom. Rob and I both personally gave Curry a 3rd round grade and argued that he had no chance of justifying a $60 million contract. Guess who was right? Drafting by conventional BPA is a great way to turn your franchise into the Arizona Cardinals.

So whenever I hear BPA I always cringe a little. People should inform themselves about players, not trust hacks to do it for them. In the end, you should always be looking for players who can be special for your team, coaching staff, and situation. The reason that PC/JS has been so phenomenally successful is because they live by this philosophy.

I think Seattle only has one area that might require an investment in the early rounds: LB.

Now normally 4-3 LBs are easily acquired. Finding good LBs in the mid to late rounds or on the cheap in free agency is relatively easy to do. Here's the catch- Pete isn't interested in about 90% of the LBs out there. He wants FAST linebackers, and there are just a couple fast linebackers with good tape in any draft, and they only rarely hit FA in their primes. This is why Seattle panicked a little and took Wagner without trying to trade down again, because when Kendricks left the board, their options were running thin.

I look at this draft and there are only 3 obvious Pete Carroll candidates for LB: Alec Ogletree, Arthur Brown, and possibly Dion Jordan. All three of them will likely go in the 1st round, though I could see Brown sliding to the early to mid 2nd. Once those guys are gone, the next best fast linebacker is Jelani Jenkins, and Jenkins looks like a career backup in the NFL. This lack of options could force Seattle to go LB in round 1, trade up in round 2 or avoid LB altogether and target the position in what might be a deeper 2014 class.

This DT class sucks. I'm not expecting a DT pick early and I'm hopeful that Seattle addresses DT in free agency. Seattle could use depth at WR and this WR class looks terrific. This isn't a great TE class but I'm a big fan of Zach Ertz, and Ertz has a solid chance to reach our first pick. I don't really expect Seattle to draft offensive line early, that would be a surprise.

Last edited by kearly on Wed Jan 09, 2013 6:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Thanks, Kearly. Your thinking is similar to mine and you expressed it much more elegantly than I could.

That said, I would still take Sheldon Richardson or Kawann Short if available, in the first round.

Jared Abbrederis is getting zero love. This is a deep receiver class but I don't want egos to spoil the chemistry of the team. Abbrederis is everything we need at WR without any of the baggage. He also has an established rapport with RW3 so I hope we lock in on him.

kearly wrote:I've always hated the term "BPA" and I try to avoid using it. The reason is because BPA is inevitably connected to the evils of conventional wisdom: Mel Kiper's big board, et al. For example, Aaron Curry was BPA in 2009 by conventional wisdom. Rob and I both personally gave Curry a 3rd round grade and argued that he had no chance of justifying a $60 million contract. Guess who was right? Drafting by conventional BPA is a great way to turn your franchise into the Arizona Cardinals.

So whenever I hear BPA I always cringe a little. People should inform themselves about players, not trust hacks to do it for them. In the end, you should always be looking for players who can be special for your team, coaching staff, and situation. The reason that PC/JS has been so phenomenally successful is because they live by this philosophy.

You and I are of the same opinion on "BPA". I used the term because everybody identifies with it, and I've used it forever, but never in it's literal sense. I certainly wouldn't draft a QB or even a CB in the first (this year) because he was BPA. I should qualify the term by adding "....that fills a need or suits our system".

Great call on Curry. I hadn't seen enough of him at WF to challenge the pick. I just know it was ultimately a bad one...worse than Bosworth. Way worse.I seldom if ever pay much stock in Kiper. I think he provides a decent guideline, as well as an element of entertainment, but until he's under contract with the Seattle Seahawks, his opinion on who we should take means little to me.

SDHawk wrote:Thanks, Kearly. Your thinking is similar to mine and you expressed it much more elegantly than I could.

That said, I would still take Sheldon Richardson or Kawann Short if available, in the first round.

Jared Abbrederis is getting zero love. This is a deep receiver class but I don't want egos to spoil the chemistry of the team. Abbrederis is everything we need at WR without any of the baggage. He also has an established rapport with RW3 so I hope we lock in on him.

I had Abbrederis in my "What I expect to happen" mock draft from a few weeks ago. Reminds me of Charly Martin, hopefully with more staying power. He also has chemistry with Wilson from 2011.

Just watched some Kawann Short. He's actually not bad, but I'm not sure if he's a 3 tech. 315 pounds is on the high end, and he doesn't have much get-off or gap shooting ability. On the plus side he is very stout against the run, I could see him being Brandon Mebane 2.0: a guy that plays 1-tech while adding a little bit of pass rush. I like him, but I'm not sure he gives us something we don't already have.

kearly wrote:We don't "need" shit. KC has needs. KC would be insane to not draft a QB #1. AZ has needs. AZ would be insane to not draft a QB or OL in the 1st round. You can't say that about the Seahawks. Are there areas of opportunity? Sure. Identify players who will be future stars in your system and go get them.

You are absolutely correct. We have the #1 defense in the league. The only thing we need to do is make more room in the trophy case (okay, we probably need to actually make a trophy case first).

No, my thought on saying we "need" a penetrating DT is because that is the most obviously missing piece and I think our continued inability to get off the field on third down speaks to that. I haven't been actively looking at who's coming up in the draft (got a playoff run to pay attention to here!) so if you say there's no good DT prospects coming up I'll believe you, but I don't think that changes the fact that we could definately stand to improve at that 3-tech spot going forward.

This poster officially refuses to recognize SacHawk2.0 as a moderator or authority figure of any description.

For everyone bringing up Branch in regards to the 2013 season, I actually see him not being retained since he is a free agent this offseason and I think he will want a bigger contract than we will be willing to give him. So, I do see DT as one of the most important positions we can address in the draft.

kearly wrote:I've always hated the term "BPA" and I try to avoid using it. The reason is because BPA is inevitably connected to the evils of conventional wisdom: Mel Kiper's big board, et al. For example, Aaron Curry was BPA in 2009 by conventional wisdom. Rob and I both personally gave Curry a 3rd round grade and argued that he had no chance of justifying a $60 million contract. Guess who was right? Drafting by conventional BPA is a great way to turn your franchise into the Arizona Cardinals.

So whenever I hear BPA I always cringe a little. People should inform themselves about players, not trust hacks to do it for them. In the end, you should always be looking for players who can be special for your team, coaching staff, and situation. The reason that PC/JS has been so phenomenally successful is because they live by this philosophy.

I don't see the term BPA as being cringe worthy as long as people are using it to suggest this team should draft BPA based on Schneider's big board (not Mel Kiper's). I'd rather people say that than, "We should draft Player X cause Walter Football blog says he's rated #10" or crap like that. IMO, people using the term BPA are, understandably, uninformed on who to draft and are just saying that they trust this front office to draft BPA (heck even unconventionally). They might also just be saying they don't see a player or need that must be addressed, leaving the option open for the front office to draft their guy.